Esra
Aquarium Advice Freak
jsoong said:
When you turn water to steam it is still H2O, just in a different state.
The same as when you freeze it, you change the state, not the elemental make up.
The Fishless Cycle - with sugar???
- Thread starter neilanh
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
When you turn water to steam it is still H2O, just in a different state.
The same as when you freeze it, you change the state, not the elemental make up.
bs6749
Aquarium Advice Addict
Esra said:
He didn't say otherwise.
Christina
Aquarium Advice Apprentice
This has turned into a very interesting chemistry debate!
Fish tanks really are great for teaching about you biology and chemistry!
I might keep mine for if I ever have children... though they might find any deaths upsetting, but I suppose that happens with hamsters as well!
Fish tanks really are great for teaching about you biology and chemistry!
I might keep mine for if I ever have children... though they might find any deaths upsetting, but I suppose that happens with hamsters as well!
Plantbrain
Aquarium Advice Freak
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2006
- Messages
- 284
Someone nagged me to come and say something.
I have two issues I'll address, both will be issues for some of you, but think about them and the points I make prior to responding.
I attack the idea, not the person.
In a new tank, I'm talking a new tank, did I say a new tank?
Okay, there is not much carbon, I'm not talking CO2(this is inorganic carbon, I'll refer to it as DIC), I'm talking reduced carbon(Organic carbon, the kind we eat), Fructose, glucose, carbohydrates, the types of carbon we need.
Bacteria that cleave organic N to form NH4 and by products as well as the bacteria oxidize the NH4 waste into NO2 and NO3 require not just NH4, they require a carbon source as well.
New tanks ain't got much of that.
So a little dab of sugar is not a bad idea.
It'll relieve any Organic carbon limitation that are slowing the bacterial growth rates down.
1/2 teaspoon per 50 gallons ought to do.
That being said, I am strongly and diametrically opposed to the Fishless cycling baloney. I worked in a Fish store for many years as kid.
We used the mulm from an existing tank to seed the new tank(Mulm is also a great source of reduced organic carbon, as well as loaded with tons of bacteria and fungi).
Sponge, floss, dirty gravel etc, any of that muck that is from an old tank should be added to a new tank. This adds precisely what is missing from a new tank vs an old established tanks.
There you go, immediate instant cycle.
Do not have any friends or a LFS or another tank within a few miles etc?
Buy zeolite. Only someone who had not thought things through would suggest adding NH4 to the tank.
Zeolite does not require any testing, nor any wait and after the zeolite is "spent", generally about 1 month, the tank is cycled and the media becomes colonized with bacteria, you may add activated carbon as well if you want. Unlike the FC method, you do not have to do as many water changes since the NH4 is bound and not oxidized into NO3 which needs exported via water change(more on water changes in a bit)
Zeolite is very cheap, no need to wait, no testing, no extra added labor.
A water change..........
If there was ever a single piece of advice I ever gave new folks and hobbyists, it's to do weekly water changes, good sized ones.
Especially during start up and when there are more issues.
If folks did weekly 50% water changes, they'd seldom ever have diseases or fish issues. This also applies reef tanks, but salt cost a fair amount, so there's a trade off there, smaller tanks are more likely to use that approach than a 400 gallon reef.
That held true 30 + years ago, it still does today.
If you remove the waste in the start up phase, there's no danger to begin with. The bacteria will colonize and adjust to the load over time, more water changes = less loading, thus more O2 for the fish and less NH4 over all.
More O2= faster and better NH4 conversion for what little is there by the aerobic bacteria.
Another thing about FC, the idea you add it to the tank...........
Why? Take a bucket, add the NH4 to that! Not the tank, run the filter in the bucket at high levels for 2-3 weeks, then add that cycled filter to the tank. With a bucket method, a 1 gallon bucket dumped is very easy compare that to...........
No need to coat everything in the tank with NH4 which later turns to NO3, now you have a tank full of NO3, which means what? Water change........
Which brings me right back to the beginning piece of advice: do water changes.
How many folks like to test water?
How many calibrate their test kits?
Zeolite does not require any of that if you cannot find any mulm from a tank that's established.
Why would a LFS horde their dirty mulm? :?
Most would be more than willing and understanding about it.
If not, you should likely shop elsewhere anyway.
Zeolite also means no waiting, you add fish, do a few water changes for the 1st 2 months, say 50% weekly and slowly add fish.
A python water changer is a much better device than any test kit.
So the smart LFS will sell them that, a tool that's useful and really saves the fish and the labor.
This hobby is successful if the new folks are successful coming into it.
If not, they quit.
Even if you assume there is something wrong based on a test kit reading, you still have to do some labor to rectify the issue if you assume there is one.
Now if you take this a step further and go into planted tanks, then we really are without any need or use for FC.
I must see about 5-10 post each month where someone added NH4 to their new planted tank and have green water algae. They overload the tank and the plants cannot take up all of and it induces various species of algae.
Plants remove the NH4 directly at lower levels and you'd be hard pressed top ever measure NH4 in a new planted tanks (or an established one).
No NO2 or NO3, no nothing. A well run non CO2 planted tanks never gets any water changes for months, sometimes years and looks a lot better than the cheesy day glow plastic plants many keep, I suggest some plastic fish to match Then you don't have to ever do any water changes or dose the fish food ever. You can sell plants, try selling old left over test kits, or bacteria or those faster growing plastic plants sometime
And the plants(well, the real ones) add O2, whereas bacteria processing NH4, use up a lot of O2 to oxidize the NH4 into NO3 which you still have to get rid and export somehow.
Happy plants = happy fish.
Water changes = good.
But the bottom line is that sugar is not a bad item to add to a brand new tank, it will speed the process up and remove the bacteria's carbon limitation.
But plants make a better solution, they add some organic carbon, they leach photosynthate(reduced Carbon) into the water column, come already pre loaded with bacteria attached to them as well as fungi etc, and they remove the NH4 directly and add O2.
Have plant eaters? Add water sprite etc to refugium or a plant filter/sump etc and add some light and you are ready to go.
If you add any or all of these: mulm, zeolite, and plants, then there's really no need for Ammonia and test kits.
Never was, but many have been hooked into the smooth talk without thinking it through to the end.
I'm not sure why really, other than bandwagon effects or maybe I'm just old school. I have the tanks, test and health to prove my results.
the idea is not bad, but the application in lieu of some very good habits that work, simpler, need to be done to some degree anyhow and make more sense seem like a much better approach.
Mulm is free, cost nothing, test kits cost $$. Zeolite is about the same as a test kit, but the zeolite will be used from then on. Test kit? Most likely not.
Good habits like water changes? That will save you for the rest of your life, test kit? Who knows, most stop using them unless there's a problem, but it is hardly preventative maintenance. The aquarist needs to do a water change anyway, so why burden them with more test kits? Think about the test, is it really something aquarist really need to do? The other thing is that these suggestions are simple and easy to understand and work more consistently.
Regards,
Tom Barr
I have two issues I'll address, both will be issues for some of you, but think about them and the points I make prior to responding.
I attack the idea, not the person.
In a new tank, I'm talking a new tank, did I say a new tank?
Okay, there is not much carbon, I'm not talking CO2(this is inorganic carbon, I'll refer to it as DIC), I'm talking reduced carbon(Organic carbon, the kind we eat), Fructose, glucose, carbohydrates, the types of carbon we need.
Bacteria that cleave organic N to form NH4 and by products as well as the bacteria oxidize the NH4 waste into NO2 and NO3 require not just NH4, they require a carbon source as well.
New tanks ain't got much of that.
So a little dab of sugar is not a bad idea.
It'll relieve any Organic carbon limitation that are slowing the bacterial growth rates down.
1/2 teaspoon per 50 gallons ought to do.
That being said, I am strongly and diametrically opposed to the Fishless cycling baloney. I worked in a Fish store for many years as kid.
We used the mulm from an existing tank to seed the new tank(Mulm is also a great source of reduced organic carbon, as well as loaded with tons of bacteria and fungi).
Sponge, floss, dirty gravel etc, any of that muck that is from an old tank should be added to a new tank. This adds precisely what is missing from a new tank vs an old established tanks.
There you go, immediate instant cycle.
Do not have any friends or a LFS or another tank within a few miles etc?
Buy zeolite. Only someone who had not thought things through would suggest adding NH4 to the tank.
Zeolite does not require any testing, nor any wait and after the zeolite is "spent", generally about 1 month, the tank is cycled and the media becomes colonized with bacteria, you may add activated carbon as well if you want. Unlike the FC method, you do not have to do as many water changes since the NH4 is bound and not oxidized into NO3 which needs exported via water change(more on water changes in a bit)
Zeolite is very cheap, no need to wait, no testing, no extra added labor.
A water change..........
If there was ever a single piece of advice I ever gave new folks and hobbyists, it's to do weekly water changes, good sized ones.
Especially during start up and when there are more issues.
If folks did weekly 50% water changes, they'd seldom ever have diseases or fish issues. This also applies reef tanks, but salt cost a fair amount, so there's a trade off there, smaller tanks are more likely to use that approach than a 400 gallon reef.
That held true 30 + years ago, it still does today.
If you remove the waste in the start up phase, there's no danger to begin with. The bacteria will colonize and adjust to the load over time, more water changes = less loading, thus more O2 for the fish and less NH4 over all.
More O2= faster and better NH4 conversion for what little is there by the aerobic bacteria.
Another thing about FC, the idea you add it to the tank...........
Why? Take a bucket, add the NH4 to that! Not the tank, run the filter in the bucket at high levels for 2-3 weeks, then add that cycled filter to the tank. With a bucket method, a 1 gallon bucket dumped is very easy compare that to...........
No need to coat everything in the tank with NH4 which later turns to NO3, now you have a tank full of NO3, which means what? Water change........
Which brings me right back to the beginning piece of advice: do water changes.
How many folks like to test water?
How many calibrate their test kits?
Zeolite does not require any of that if you cannot find any mulm from a tank that's established.
Why would a LFS horde their dirty mulm? :?
Most would be more than willing and understanding about it.
If not, you should likely shop elsewhere anyway.
Zeolite also means no waiting, you add fish, do a few water changes for the 1st 2 months, say 50% weekly and slowly add fish.
A python water changer is a much better device than any test kit.
So the smart LFS will sell them that, a tool that's useful and really saves the fish and the labor.
This hobby is successful if the new folks are successful coming into it.
If not, they quit.
Even if you assume there is something wrong based on a test kit reading, you still have to do some labor to rectify the issue if you assume there is one.
Now if you take this a step further and go into planted tanks, then we really are without any need or use for FC.
I must see about 5-10 post each month where someone added NH4 to their new planted tank and have green water algae. They overload the tank and the plants cannot take up all of and it induces various species of algae.
Plants remove the NH4 directly at lower levels and you'd be hard pressed top ever measure NH4 in a new planted tanks (or an established one).
No NO2 or NO3, no nothing. A well run non CO2 planted tanks never gets any water changes for months, sometimes years and looks a lot better than the cheesy day glow plastic plants many keep, I suggest some plastic fish to match
Then you don't have to ever do any water changes or dose the fish food ever. You can sell plants, try selling old left over test kits, or bacteria or those faster growing plastic plants sometime And the plants(well, the real ones) add O2, whereas bacteria processing NH4, use up a lot of O2 to oxidize the NH4 into NO3 which you still have to get rid and export somehow.
Happy plants = happy fish.
Water changes = good.
But the bottom line is that sugar is not a bad item to add to a brand new tank, it will speed the process up and remove the bacteria's carbon limitation.
But plants make a better solution, they add some organic carbon, they leach photosynthate(reduced Carbon) into the water column, come already pre loaded with bacteria attached to them as well as fungi etc, and they remove the NH4 directly and add O2.
Have plant eaters? Add water sprite etc to refugium or a plant filter/sump etc and add some light and you are ready to go.
If you add any or all of these: mulm, zeolite, and plants, then there's really no need for Ammonia and test kits.
Never was, but many have been hooked into the smooth talk without thinking it through to the end.
I'm not sure why really, other than bandwagon effects or maybe I'm just old school. I have the tanks, test and health to prove my results.
the idea is not bad, but the application in lieu of some very good habits that work, simpler, need to be done to some degree anyhow and make more sense seem like a much better approach.
Mulm is free, cost nothing, test kits cost $$. Zeolite is about the same as a test kit, but the zeolite will be used from then on. Test kit? Most likely not.
Good habits like water changes? That will save you for the rest of your life, test kit? Who knows, most stop using them unless there's a problem, but it is hardly preventative maintenance. The aquarist needs to do a water change anyway, so why burden them with more test kits? Think about the test, is it really something aquarist really need to do? The other thing is that these suggestions are simple and easy to understand and work more consistently.
Regards,
Tom Barr
fish 'n' fries
Aquarium Advice Freak
Beautifully "spoken" Tom.
OP
OP
neilanh
Sliced Bread
Thank you Tom! Great Post!
squawkbert
Aquarium Advice Freak
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2006
- Messages
- 274
Great post, Tom (I wish I had read it earlier).
Point of clarification please - the zeolite is there to soak up the excess NH3, while the bacteria adjust their numbers, right?
I sort of did some of what was in the post when starting my 46g - it started in a bucket, then moved to the tank after a couple of weeks. I did add NH3 to the mix of old and new gravel, then did a ~95% PWC before adding fish. I started w/ 16 fish and am now up to 22. The only deaths I've had are some Cardinal Tetras (importation or other stress related issue, I'm thinking - they go great for a while, then develop a white patch on one side, weaken & die within a few hours of that) [/digression].
Point of clarification please - the zeolite is there to soak up the excess NH3, while the bacteria adjust their numbers, right?
I sort of did some of what was in the post when starting my 46g - it started in a bucket, then moved to the tank after a couple of weeks. I did add NH3 to the mix of old and new gravel, then did a ~95% PWC before adding fish. I started w/ 16 fish and am now up to 22. The only deaths I've had are some Cardinal Tetras (importation or other stress related issue, I'm thinking - they go great for a while, then develop a white patch on one side, weaken & die within a few hours of that) [/digression].
7Enigma
Aquarium Advice Addict
Tom, you are just old school.
I have said it before and will say it again, the fishless cycling procedure has created the most humane way to prepare a tank for stocking, bar none.
You are picking and choosing a very specific FC method based on your last post. Many of us recommend EVERYTING you posted when doing a fishless cycle. We try to get people to get mulm from an established tank. That's #1 on the list.
For you to say forget the test kits, just add some mulm, add your fish, and do PWC's frequently is poor, bordering on bad advice. I know your against test kits, especially for ferts in planted tanks, but this is not about deficiencies, this is about the damage that can be done to the fish in the tank if not properly prepared.
The purpose of seeding a TANK and not just a bucket is due to colonization of surfaces. Why build a bioload in a bucket where you lose all of that bacteria attached to the surfaces? Why not do it directly in the tank? Especially when every fishless cycling article I've read has required a large PWC at the end of the cycle. You make it sound like its a horror to do a large PWC at the end of the cycle. In many cases a large PWC probably isn't even needed if stocked when the cycle is actually complete (as opposed to waiting several days after where you are continually dosing in more ammonia).
In the end, it comes down to availability. You are assuming everyone has access to copious amounts of seed material, I don't make that assumption with FC. You can live in the middle of no where, you can have no seed material, never heard of a shrimp, and not even have fish food and you could fishless cycle. Please read through the article on Fishless Cycling on this website to see how its presented. We are not against seeding and plants, we are against mistreatment from animals.
I have said it before and will say it again, the fishless cycling procedure has created the most humane way to prepare a tank for stocking, bar none.
You are picking and choosing a very specific FC method based on your last post. Many of us recommend EVERYTING you posted when doing a fishless cycle. We try to get people to get mulm from an established tank. That's #1 on the list.
For you to say forget the test kits, just add some mulm, add your fish, and do PWC's frequently is poor, bordering on bad advice. I know your against test kits, especially for ferts in planted tanks, but this is not about deficiencies, this is about the damage that can be done to the fish in the tank if not properly prepared.
The purpose of seeding a TANK and not just a bucket is due to colonization of surfaces. Why build a bioload in a bucket where you lose all of that bacteria attached to the surfaces? Why not do it directly in the tank? Especially when every fishless cycling article I've read has required a large PWC at the end of the cycle. You make it sound like its a horror to do a large PWC at the end of the cycle. In many cases a large PWC probably isn't even needed if stocked when the cycle is actually complete (as opposed to waiting several days after where you are continually dosing in more ammonia).
In the end, it comes down to availability. You are assuming everyone has access to copious amounts of seed material, I don't make that assumption with FC. You can live in the middle of no where, you can have no seed material, never heard of a shrimp, and not even have fish food and you could fishless cycle. Please read through the article on Fishless Cycling on this website to see how its presented. We are not against seeding and plants, we are against mistreatment from animals.
fish 'n' fries
Aquarium Advice Freak
Just for my knowledge 7Enigma, what's the research/data that your fishless cycle's based on? Thanks.
7Enigma
Aquarium Advice Addict
fish 'n' fries said:
I don't understand your question. Are you asking me why a FC is beneficial compared to the standard method of introducing hardy fish or slowly stocking with seeded material? Or are you asking me about the underlying mechanisms that a new tank doesn't have that an established tank has?
A couple specific quotes and responses follow:
Immediate? So I can dump some mulm in and there will be no ammonia? How much do I need? How many fish can I stock today? What size fish? Can I feed them right away?
A single large PWC prior to addition of your fish? Sounds awful time consuming to me as well. Never mind that you now have a tank covered in bacteria (which can adapt much more readily to increased bioload BTW), and have already started the diatom cycle.
Why waste time doing frequent heavy water changes? You mean I can't add my fish in at once?
How many water changes do I need to do? Will a 50% change suffice? 2? I haven't seen one of my fish in a couple days and I'm seeing a bit of GW. Did it die, or is it just hiding? Oh, I just found it (it died), how much ammonia is in the water? Is it 1ppm, 5ppm, or 10ppm? That 50% PWC would be fine with 1ppm, 5ppm not so much, 10ppm, they are still in dire straits.
As the saying goes Ignorance is bliss. Taking the approach of not testing because you feel it isn't needed, or because you've done something for a while and its *appeared* to not be detrimental doesn't fly in my logic test.
This is my problem with trying to promote irresponsible behavior. Back when the hobby was relatively new you'd stick a couple hardy fish in a tank, feed sparingly or starve them for a while, flush em', and go get the fish you really want. But only a couple. You needed to slowly add in your stock or else you could kill the whole tank, or be left with permanently damaged fish that probably won't live a full lifespan. That worked, for many years, some people still advocate it. Does it work? Sure. Is it right? I personally don't think so.
We now have a way to make sure prior to adding your first fish that they will never see elevated levels of ammonia/nitrIte. They won't have to deal with the stress of frequent large water changes or quick fix chemicals, starvation, increased susceptibility to disease, and pain. Oh, and done properly, you can add ALL of your fish at once.
Not a couple here and there, waiting for a while (how long? We don't need a test kit right!), then adding in some more, having another minicycle, rinse and repeat. Just do a bunch of water changes. 50% sounds good, once a week sounds good too.
I hope this helps to clarify my and many others opinions on FC, and why we feel it is the EASIEST and requires the LEAST amount of work with the smallest chance of problems. We have DATA to back up our reasons for when you can and cannot stock, DATA to back up when/if something died/went awry, and LACK OF DATA that shows other methods are superior or even adequate.
I leave you with one of my favorite quotes, one that I try to keep in mind every day:
"The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. It would not perhaps be too fanciful to say that a new idea is the most quickly acting antigen known to science. If we watch ourselves honestly we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated."
Wilfred Batten Lewis Trotter (1872-1939) English surgeon.
fish 'n' fries
Aquarium Advice Freak
7Enigma said:
Neither...I understand the concept and why you think it's better. I'm wondering what study or data was used to prove that this method is "most humane" and the method of choice to prevent "mistreatment [I'm assuming you meant "of"] animals". I've not been able to find anything that compares methods... just different individual opinions of which methods are best.
7Enigma
Aquarium Advice Addict
fish 'n' fries said:
I don't think such a study has been done to my knowledge. I would argue, however, that its a simple logical exercise. I would also argue that it is the most fail-safe, ie, least likely to get screwed up. That is, if the person can read simple directions and use liquid test kits they can't lose.
That's one of the problems with a lot of methods, they are non-specific. They don't take into account the person that might not have great analytical skills. They might not keep notes of when they started cycling, or forgot to do a PWC, fed to much the night before, etc.
I think there are 3 arguments going on in this thread (sorry none about the OP
):1. Is Tom's opinion that FC is a bad method of cycling a tank.
2. Is FC "better" than traditional cycling?
3. Is Tom's opinion that we should not use test kits.
Number 1 is difficult for me to comprehend. I've presented my reasoning why we feel its a good method. It is the only method that allows us to know PRIOR to addition of fish that the bioload can be handled effectively (no lagging ammonia or nitrIte). So someone can have a contrary opinion that there is a better method available, but to say its a BAD method is tough for me to swallow.
Number 2 is a subjective argument, but I'll try to present it in a concise light. Can we agree that the ultimate goal is to not harm the fish? That means no gill burns (ammonia), no carbon monoxide like effects (nitrIte poisoning). If that is the goal, and we can create a biological filter larger than required for our fish prior to adding in the fish, I don't see how any other method holds a candle to it. In every other method there will be elevated levels of ammonia and/or nitrIte, to what degree depends on a lot of factors.
Please note this does NOT include the "silent" plant cycling method because it is VERY easy to develop problems. This is often proposed as a superior technique to FC, but I think there is also quite a bit of risk involved as well (if your plants become deficient in a fert, and you miss it, you've just lost your biological filter). Not to mention you're just begging for algae. In most FC methods, tank lights are kept OFF to prevent any type of algae from growing in the ammonia rich water.
Number 3 is a very dangerous statement. It relies on non-data. It relies on one's perception of the health of the tank and inhabitants. Most people cannot look at a tank and realize the ammonia or nitrIte levels are elevated (especially newbies who are the LEAST likely to observe adverse conditions). Levels can increase RAPIDLY, just look at some of the posts in the Getting Started forum. Those new members came home with a new tank and several fish, and are now doing PWC's very frequently. 1 or 2 50% PWC's a week might not be enough to get those levels to a safe range. I'm sure some experienced fish-keepers can tell water quality issues by just looking at the tank for minute signs of distress, but that would be the minority IMO, not the majority.
#3 does NOT mean that those with test kits don't do water changes. It doesn't mean many of us don't do frequent LARGE water changes. It does, however, allow us to be confident that at any given time we can take a snapshot of what the water quality is. We don't need to take it to a LFS, we don't need to frantically come post on here asking for help to some symptoms (because the first thing we normally ask is what is your parameters, and if you don't know go and buy a kit).
Similar threads
